The case in summary: Eight women have been killed by their current or former partner in Norway in the last six months. A man has breached a restraining order against his ex-partner and their son five times, but was released by the court. The lawyer for the woman believes that the case is particularly serious in view of the recent murder cases where partner violence has been the background. The reason for the release is that imprisonment would be a “disproportionate” intervention against the man. The man’s lawyer believes it was right for the court to release his client. The summary is made by an AI service from OpenAi. The content is quality assured by news’s journalists before publication. The past year has been marked by several cases of violence in close relationships that have ended in murder. In the last six months alone, eight women have been killed by their current or former partner in Norway, according to an overview from VG. Two of the murders took place in 2024. Charlotte Marie Ringkjøb is a legal aid lawyer for a woman who has been the victim of violence in close relationships in Nordland. She wants to talk about the situation of the woman seen in the light of the cases of intimate partner violence recently. From 31 October to 18 December last year, the man broke the contact ban against the woman and their common son five times. The man has previously been convicted of violence against the woman and for several breaches of a restraining order against her and her son. The man was arrested on 20 December and was produced for custody by the police. Released But a couple of days before Christmas, the court chose not to remand the man for the violations of the contact ban against the woman – even though the district court concluded that he would probably commit new violations if he was released. The district court on the risk of repetition “After an overall assessment, the court believes that the frequency of the offenses in the seven weeks the accused is reasonably suspected of, compared with the previous history of previous violations of the restraining order, means that there is a strong degree of preponderance of probability that the accused will commit new criminal acts”. The case was appealed by the police, but the Court of Appeal agreed with the District Court. – The way I interpret the ruling, the accused gets almost the court’s approval that this is not that serious and that he can continue to break the contact ban without it having any concrete effect on him, says Ringkjøb to news. Assistant lawyer Charlotte Marie Ringkjøb. Photo: Josef Benoni Ness Tveit / news The lawyer believes the case is particularly serious considering that there have been several murder cases recently where partner violence has been the background. – I thought about it during Christmas, repeatedly. I got a real lump in my stomach from this case. I do not understand that they dared to release him in view of his history – and as the court itself writes in the ruling: “there is a strong degree of preponderance of probability that the accused will commit new criminal acts which could result in a sentence of more than six months if he is released », says Ringkjøb. – How is your client now? – It is a very sad and difficult situation for her. She is surprised that the court believes that her security, given the history of the case, is considered less valuable than the man’s need for freedom, Ringkjøb replies. Disagree The reason for the release is that imprisonment would be a “disproportionate” intervention against the man and that one of the breaches of the contact ban in particular is considered by the court to be of a less serious nature. – In my view, there is no such thing as a “slight” violation of the curfew. If you have a visiting or contact ban, you must not make contact in any way whatsoever with the person the ban is intended to protect. It should be a simple rule to comply with, says Ringkjøb. The man was released from custody by both the Lofoten and Salten District Court and the Hålogaland Court of Appeal. Photo: Josef Benoni Ness Tveit / news The lawyer understands little of the court’s decision. – That the court steps in and says “yes, there are five breaches of the no-contact order, but that they are not that serious”, I think that is special. Then large parts of the considerations behind the rule are gone – namely to create peace and security for the aggrieved. This is what the district court and the court of appeal conclude with: Salten and Lofoten district court’s assessment: “The court believes there are reasonable grounds for suspicion. The court therefore finds that it is more likely that the accused is guilty than not guilty of the charge. In order for the accused to be remanded in custody, at least one of the conditions in the Criminal Procedure Act § 171 first paragraph nos. i to 4 must also be met. The prosecution has justified imprisonment with a risk of repetition, see section 171 first paragraph no. 3. The accused is released.” Hålogaland Court of Appeal’s assessment: “The Court of Appeal agrees with the district court that imprisonment in this case would be a disproportionate intervention. Like the district court, the Court of Appeal assumes that the basic condition for imprisonment in the Criminal Procedure Act, section 171, first paragraph, and the special condition for imprisonment in the Criminal Procedure Act, section 171, first paragraph, no. 3, are met. The district court’s closer justification for this is being sought” – Absolutely correct The man’s lawyer Johannes Wegner Mæland says that he understands the situation of the woman, but that it was right for the court to release his client. – The rights of the accused, in particular the court’s duty to assess the proportionality of imprisonment, are a fundamental guarantee of legal certainty in society. The man’s defender Johannes Wegner Mæland believes his client should never have been considered for custody. Photo: Ole Jørgen Kostadbråthen / news Mæland believes the breaches of the no-contact order were “clearly disproportionate” and that the police should never have asked for the man’s detention. He explains that the breaches were not of a serious nature and that one of them occurred when his client copied the woman in an e-mail. – The accused put the aggrieved person on a copy of an e-mail to a public agency where he asked for confirmation that the previous sentence would be fulfilled. It was unfortunate and he apologizes for it, says Mæland. news has submitted the criticism from Ringkjøb to magistrate Ingrid Johanne Lillevik in the Salten and Lofoten district court. Lillevik replies that, on a general basis, they do not comment on individual cases and refers to what the courts have already concluded from the detention meetings.
ttn-69
Father convicted of rape broke the contact ban five times – lawyer reacts to the fact that the man was not imprisoned – news Nordland
